Effects of dietary red-osier dogwood (<i>Cornus stolonifera</i>) on growth performance, blood profile, ileal morphology, and oxidative status in weaned pigs challenged with <i>Escherichia coli</i> K88<sup>+</sup>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A total of 28 piglets weaned at 21 d of age (6.94 ± 0.28 kg of body weight) were assigned to one of four dietary treatments for 14 d: (1) negative control (NC; a corn–wheat–soybean meal diet), (2) positive control [PC; NC + 0.025% antimicrobial growth promoter (AGP)], (3) ROD2 [2% red-osier dogwood (ROD)], and (4) ROD4 (4% ROD). All pigs were orally inoculated with Escherichia coli K88+ on day 8. The pre-planned orthogonal test was performed to compare (1) NC vs. PC and (2) NC vs. ROD. The inclusion of ROD in a nursery diet increased (P < 0.05) superoxide dismutase (SOD) activities and decreased (P < 0.05) malondialdehyde (MDA) concentrations in the serum. Moreover, pigs fed with ROD diets had shallower (P < 0.05) crypt depth and higher (P < 0.05) villus height to crypt depth ratio than those fed the NC diet. Dietary AGP supplementation reduced (P < 0.05) the MDA concentration in the ileum and serum at 24 h after challenge, and improved (P < 0.01) the SOD activities in the serum. In conclusion, the inclusion of ROD in a nursery diet enhanced the antioxidative defense system and intestinal morphology, showing comparable effects with AGP supplementation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".